SpitVX Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 http://cl.ly/0B2F0r3v2N2j2n0e1a3lI would be glad of any fed back regarding this idea for mounting my rear discs .I have nicked others top bracket solution but also have cut off the bottom of the MGF carriers and plan to have bottom brackets made up as illustrated .These will be linked to the chassis at two points via a crudeish wishbone design combining 1 1/4" ally suspension rods with rod ends , running through a 2 1/4" ally tube as shown . Not the most efficient design I realise but should still be reasonably light and hopefully strong .http://cl.ly/0z3y1w1v0u3N0M3a0X1Chttp://cl.ly/2f2O47061s22471f0y1x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 Nice idea on the uprights. However, I have wondered if the existing holes (or just one) on the legs at the bottom could not be welded up and redrilled. Would be easier and the lower wishbone/shock could all be on the same bolt. Not sure how it would affect the supension, and it may need careful modelling. But your idea of cutting off and bolting a fabricated section top and bottom should work well.As to the lower wishbone, why such huge ali tube? I would use CDS steel, as used on the kitcars. Possibly steal marcus's design/layout too, or something similar. He has cracked the no camber change issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Jones Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 I don't see the point of chopping the bottom of the carrier off.The lugs on there don't suit a single wishbone design it is true, but then you aren't using a single wishbone. IIRC, Marcus' twin link design doesn't use a radius arm (third link) and could be adapted to work with the existing MGF carrier.Myself, I'd be looking closely at the original MGF lower arm layout as I believe it can be adapted to suit the Triumph chassis and it doesn't need the 3rd link. You might even be able to adapt the MGF arms?CheersNick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpitVX Posted June 3, 2012 Author Share Posted June 3, 2012 Thank you for your replies .It seemed the easiest route was to stick to the origional critical dimensions exactly , but with adjustability .I know of someone else going all MGF route but A ) allthough the end results might have some advantages I think the planning and complexity would be considerable and B ) it has to be good to explore a variety of options .The wishbone design is merely a product of utmost simplicity , no odd angles , just three holes in a tube and some welding . It should still be comparatively light and I am hoping very strong which will be needed as I am looking to keep the upright very stable without the use of a tie rod .The lower bracket will of course be tigged to the upright as well as the single bolt .The front 6 1/4" suspension arm will link to the original ( Canleys ) GT6 mounting bracket so I will only need to weld two rear brackets for the rear rods , as it happens if you switch the Canley brackets on to the opposite sides they are close to fitting as rear mounts . I intend to beef up all the brackets as I feel they could otherwise be a weak link .The rods were from a company in the states called M&W , very strong and very good service from them at a good price . They will supply almost any length any wall thickness , any thread , swagged or unswagged , ally or steel . Highly recommended .As soon as I can I will list the comparative weights of the components to the originals . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpitVX Posted June 4, 2012 Author Share Posted June 4, 2012 Did a bit of weighing this morning ,The main 2 1/2" by 1/4" tube at 27.5 cm is 77.0g .The straight through 1 1/4 rod with It's rod ends is 65.3g .The two shorter rods 12.3 cm without rod ends are 40.17 gThe rod ends are 19g each so x 2 is 38.0g This totals 220.47g total weight for the wishbone ( plus weld ) compared to 193.0g for an original wishbone so 27.3g heavier but loosing the radius arm saves 87.8g so 60ish g lighter overall .If my calcs are correct I am very happy with that .I guess the MGF hub / disc assembly will be heavier than original so it's good to know this has at least started in the right direction . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpitVX Posted June 9, 2012 Author Share Posted June 9, 2012 Just another view .Find it hard to believe this is not going to work well .However I am no mechanical engineer like some on here so unless someone can either show fancy calcs to prove otherwise or post convincing theories to it's weaknesses I guess only time will be it's judge .Be happy to hear any more from anyone , not easy theorising on your own you know !Thanks . Matt .http://cl.ly/0j0A0i3D3k3H1h3w0P2WPS I think I should extend the damper bolts another 30mm so they tie into the VL giving another tie in for the bracket as well as the other bolt shown in earlier pic but not here and the tigging . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpitVX Posted June 10, 2012 Author Share Posted June 10, 2012 Is it me or is it ' village of the damned ' .X . X . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpitVX Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 Allthough there seems little interest in my exploits I will none the less keep this thread updated .KD and a friend came down and picked up my existing new susspension for Lain's spit , nice genuine pair , good to chat to them and their plans/progress .The engineers have given me a six week ETA for my lower brackets and are going to fit in the wishbones sooner . This leaves the top bracket ;http://cl.ly/2D2g0w1U000f3U0N1M47or something similar and the fabrication of a rear chassis/wishbone bracket or modification of a Canleys bracket , also , the attachment of some newly fabricated polybush locating cup rings , as are on the Triumph diff , onto my New Zealand Subaru ' front ' diff conversion bracket ,http://cl.ly/3T2s103T3F013S0K0P2W which is helpful as the holes were drilled slightly too close together so this gives a chance to correct this minor issue .Then I can go from this http://cl.ly/1m2a1I1l2s1K2u041X39 to http://cl.ly/190k1L3s3Y1z1l3p2P0G and yes I do need new split rim bolts , this is what happens when you spend 8 years on a build . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted User Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 looking good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpitVX Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 Thanks Bobby , you don't know how frustrating it is knowing what it could be like when finished but not having the cash or space or WEATHER to get it done .I don't NEED the encouragement as I would never give up on it but it does help :-) . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Keep the threads going, it's always good to see other peoples engineering projects and ideas, even if we don't comment on them, I believe there are many who are as interested as me. 8)Nice to see the engineering behind the Subaru Diff conversion as I am looking to do something similar with a Cosworth diff at some point.All the best.Spider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpitVX Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 Cheers Spider . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GT6 M Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Spit, just seens this thread, As Clive says earlier, I did mine to get the camber correct.and also to doo away with the tie bar, thus no tracking change.If ye dont use longer lower links, then the camber change still exists.have you thought about the camber,!!!M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Jones Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Matt,Re the fitting of the Subaru diff, there was some discussion on this subject on the Sideways forum a while back herehttp://sideways-technologies.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic/5171-nicks-us-spec-gt6/page__st__20This has unfortunately lost it's pictures but the one I refer to in post 35 is shown below.Might be worth contacting Nick Moore as it's his GT6 resto that's getting this treatment (see the "dipped in green glass" thread). I know he has Roto vertical links modified to take R100/MGF hubs, and shafts but I don't know if he's resolved how they are going to link to the Subaru diff yet.As regards the use of the complete MGF hub, have you seen the way that John Davies has done his? This is elegant in that all of the adaption work for the bottom of the link is in the special fabricated wishbone, meaning that there is no need to mod the bottom of the vertical link. I have some pictures somewhere but can't find them at present.I though KD and Mike Bestard were working on a Subaru diff conversion kit?CheersNick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve AKA vitessesteve Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Read some news about KD Subaru project on facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Laughing-Dog-Developments/105838012772063 post dated 2 April 2012.Quote:Laughing Dog Developments collected first batch of GT6 VITESSE Alloy links last week for the Subaru CV Conversion.. wont be long now as all the other parts have been made and are ready to assemble . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpitVX Posted June 18, 2012 Author Share Posted June 18, 2012 Thank you for your further replies , I shall take a look a the suggested threads/info and come back to you all . M . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpeg.b15b81ef10abeea1c3039ae03c4a9f3a.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.